Well 2 months ago i got the change to drive a fwd car in zandvoort,
And offcourse as you can feel it coming i hate fwd aswell, it turns in perfect but the the endles understear.. same in lfs in all fwd understear all the way.
Thats also why i dont get why we get another fwd in lfs the 24h version would have been a way better chooise imo.
The abs is imo the biggest ( should i say ) noob option? afaik i know has ever been in lfs. Worst thing is, ive tested it and its even faster
Why should we get options like this if there are many other small bugs in lfs what imo should be fixed before a useless option like TC or ABS or even worse Stability controle
I'm just going to speak on what's needed to be realized here..
The simple fact of the matter is, little to no car manufactures want their products on a 'sim' like LFS. Basically.
The VW Scirocco is a step up from the fake cars that are on LFS atm yes, i will admit that. Finally a real car right? But seriously think about just how popular this car is(n't). VolksWagon will not be at a loss or gain either way for advertisement once this car goes out in LFS.
Simple things such as glitches in LFS; touch a car you go flying, barriers you go flying, pit lane walls you go flying, tires heat and give off an akward smoke trail that only stops once the tires arent heated up anymore, damage( a big reason ).
If you were the owner of lets say, Audi.
Would you want your car in such a game?
( I don't wish to start arguements, just a bit of opinions/facts.)
I think.. the keypoint is to avoid crashing and then flying off insanely! Anyway you must be seriously mad to care 'bout a lil glitch like that "oh noes!!! My audi flew off, what an emberassment"
TBH the main reason I wouldn't want my car in a sim would be because of comparison to competing models, but if there are no competing models in the sim then that's not a problem.
Assuming the sim is any good, anyway. I doubt being modelled in rFactor has flattered many sports cars.
I've personally owned 3 FWD cars, I currently drive a RWD car, and I race a mid engined RWD single seater. But I drive cars on an almost daily basis for work - mostly older "classic" cars, but very often modern cars too, plus my parents daily car (currently a horrid Merc E-Class), or one from the collection (Stratos, Griffith (the nice one from the 60s/70s), G4R etc), my brothers car (AMG C-Class, but it used to be a Toyota Sera), friends cars (just the other day I was playing in a friends 350Z, and I'd spent many miles in his Saxo that he used to have).
I think I've driven enough cars to comment on how horrible FWD is. I've yet to try a modern Mini (and I refuse to drive one on principle that they're not miniature and they're nowhere near as good as a proper Mini, doubly so with the modern Italian Job I also refuse to watch on principle ), or the latest Civic Type R (though on all accounts it's far worse that the not-quite-as-ugly one that came before it).
Maybe they're 'ok' (but no better) if you are stupid enough to spend more than £20k on a FWD car, but anyone with a brain would surely buy something better?
Just look at the fat, bloated, heavy, huge modern Mini! Then look at an original style Mini. Which one is quite clearly better? Which one is, without needing stupid adverts, is clearly an icon for almost anything.
I don't doubt the modern Mini is a good car. It's even, apparently, good for a FWD. But I cannot hold a candle to an original Mini in 99.9% of 'tests'.
Well that's exactly it, isn't it? The quotation marks around that word
I've never driven a classic Mini, but I drive a modern one from work and I have to say that it is a wonderful car handling wise, and the performance isn't bad at all either, even in the Diesels (yes, we all know how much you despise those :tilt. Twisty roads are an absolute joy I would never buy one, though.
You always have to resort to insulting people who might think differently
FWD cars are often great to drive, particularly on the road, if you can't recognise that and only take pleasure from the occasional over-steery moments which you can more easily experience in a RWD car, perhaps making you feel like Nigel Mansell, then that's fine. Your choice.
Aren't FWD cars better to drive on daily basis, as to work evreyday, throughout all different weather conditions and so on? Although yes it might be less fun compared to RWD lol, but for fun you can go to tracks with your other car if ya got one.
It's not the oversteer on demand of a RWD that excites me - the public road isn't the place to indulge in that sort of driving except in very exceptional circumstances (damp roundabout on a dual carriageway miles from anywhere on a road you know as not having pedestrian access for example).
It's the lack of balance. It's the lack of being able to steer the car on the throttle. It's the feeling of torque steer. It's the steering going lighter as you put the power on (as opposed to straight line torque steer, which I admit it very rare these days).
Of course, some RWD cars are awful too!
And I bought a 205 and a 306 on the basis of Peugeots handling reputation. I loved them, until I started driving RWD cars, when I realised that they were only good relative to other FWD cars, rather than being good outright.
Well, living in a quite flat country where the annual snowfall is only in meters if you measure it horizontally, that might be true.
But as soon as you have to go up somewhere that's higher than the average house on a snowy or icy road, you quickly learn to despise RWD cars. The only upside of them over FWDs (or AWDs) is that you usually don't have to reverse down to take a new try, as you'll end up facing backwards anyway.
Yep, this is why FWD cars are extremely popular (for the safety).
It's necessary to state that the first FWD cars were built for competition, for having the engine at the front and the transmission right between the driver and the engine helped having a 50/50 weight ratio because of the heavy materials used to buidl a car in the 20's-30's.
"Modern" (from the 70's to nowadays) FWD are popular, because of the 52/48ish weight ratio, which creates a sharp turn-in, and understeer over power due to the front wheels slipping. Thus, you can still turn well, and don't risk spinning out on power (you just release the gas if you're taking the corner too wide). However, a RWD acheiving a 50/50 weight ratio, will have better performance than a 50/50 FWD.
For racing purposes, a car with the exact same characteristics but the drivetrain will have better times than an FWD on short races, and will last longer on long races (for in a FWD, the front tires are overheated compared to the rearies). This is an "absolute" comparison. Speaking of relative comparison, some FWD cars can own other RWD cars with different specs. (aka the new Minis vs modern BMW on narrow and twisty roads).
What about the AWD then ? They are extremely forgiving, but they only get extremely powerful when you have 4 wheel steering and a Center LSD (Open center differential will give the power to the axle where the spinning wheel, which makes either no power with open diff on both axles and only one powered wheel if the said axle has a LSD). Just look at the "heavy" Nissan GTR-32 in its track application (39 victories in 39 races).
That's not the point, and you know it! It's a fact that you can't please everybody. Stating it here as some kind of proof is pure BS.
The matter of a fact is, and which you are so conveniently avoiding, that if Scavier is working on smth. then whatever that is people want it to enhance their game play experience the most. And adding the VW Scirocco is not on top of anybodys list of game play experience enhancing shit!
Now you on the other hand are the type of person who gets all exited about a new nob on the dash board that takes 2 months to add and don't get why everybody is complaining because its for free.
I mean no disrespect to the devs, I just want to make it clear why people might be unhappy and that whilst you can't ever make everybody happy, you sure as hell can do much better than the VW Scirocco (real car or not).
Rear wheel drive cars should be much better than there front wheel drive counterparts in low traction conditions, if a driver can't cope with anything other than enormous understeer they shouldn't be on the road, although most rear wheel drive road cars will naturally understeer when they're not being provoked.
and the other reason behind the success of FF (besides the easy, predictable handling) is that layout, unlike FR, makes for short bonnet cars with a spacious inside.
The (original) Mini is quite a clear example of that.
But the engine (which is heavy) is still generally over the front wheels.
The argument with RWD is that you can mount the engine closer to the middle of the car behind the front wheels. Thus reducing the weight over the front wheels themselves.
If a FWD car is set up to be ridiculously stiff, and ahve a lot of grip for the power it has, then it can handle fairly well (Mini Miglias and BTCC with big slicks), but its just horrifying how you have to sit and listen to the front outer wheel squealing away with your foot mashed to the floor mid corner and not getting anywhere fast, its just so damn inefficient!
Theres no denying the fact that when it comes to high speed driving and cornering, FWD is horribly flawed, FWD is perfectly ok for driving sedately on public roads, but just try and take a bend quickly in an FWD car, you will either understeer into something or have to dump loads of power to drag the front end around with tyres squealing.
Its much better to simply smoothly and carefully turn a car using the power to the rear wheels, (on a track, not the road!), obviously that takes a while to get used to doing.
Anyway you must be seriously mad to care 'bout a lil glitch like that "oh noes!!! My audi flew off, what an emberassment"
), or the latest Civic Type R (though on all accounts it's far worse that the not-quite-as-ugly one that came before it).
I would never buy one, though.